international organizations. single vetoes. israel leaders have called president obama's support for and cooperation with israel unprecedented. governor romney, though, said relations between the united states and israel had "hit a low" and went on to accuse president obama of -- this is a good one -- "throwing israel under the bus." that's just one in a long litany of untruths about our administration's policy toward israel uttered by governor romney and repeatedly debunked by reporters, policy experts, facts checkers across the country, and maybe most conventionally debunked by israeli leaders. maybe the governor's simply unaware or misinformed again. unfortunately, it's more likely in my view the governor is falling back on one of his party's favorite tricks of

late -- distort and mischaracterize your opponent's position, keep repeating the distortions and mischaracterizations over and over again, even whenever objective observer says you're wrong. keep repeating in the hope that it will eventually stick. president obama has reshaped american foreign policy. to contend with the challenges of the president but also to face the threats of the future. and i believe he's done it with strength and wisdom. governor romney wants to take us back to a world that no longer exists with policies that are dangerously divorced from today's realities. looking backwards is all the more misguided because for all the peril of our times, america's promise has never, never, never been greater. in the 20th century, the wealth of a nation was judged by the size of its population, the the strength of its army, the abundance of its raw materials,

and the expanse of its landmass. in the 21st century, these measures still matter, and on that measure america still prevails. but more than ever before you students know better than any of us, more than ever before, the 21st century, the true wealth of a nation is to be found in its human resources, its people, and their ability to imagine, to innovate, to build, to compete. folks, by that measure, america's also uniquely blessed. the president and i believe our job, our job in government is to help provide our people, all of our people an environment in which they can fulfill the incredible potential our younger people have. if we do our job, i believe our

nation would be more secure, because america's strength, america's strength in the world depends ultimately on the strength of the american dream here at home and on our economy. that means investing in our students, our teachers, our schools, our university. it means investing in advance research and development, catching up to the rest of the world in medicine, in science, in the most modern airports, ports, bridges, roads, all of which help increase the ability of american businesses to increase productivity and access to the world, to invest in clean, sustainable energy, in cutting-edge manufacturing. no one is better position ed, n one, no nation is better positioned than the united states in all those areas.

it also means welcoming people from around the world, which is which has always been a source of new blood and new brainpower throughout american history. it means rewarding hard work, demanding responsibility, insisting on accountability, and creating opportunity for all our citizens. these are the investments and the commitments that will grow our economy, create new jobs, keep america strong at home, and allow us to continue to be the strongest nation in the world and the leader of the world. and these investments and commitments, commitments president obama and i have made and will continue to make, i think was needed for america's future. as vice president, on behalf of our nation, i have traveled well over half a million miles since being sworn in as vice president, many of them to far-flung countries all around the world. like many of you who have traveled -- students and

nonstudents here -- we all have the same kind of feeling when you get home, the same -- the same just sort of intuitive feeling. there's no country like america. there's no potential like america. i was asked earlier how would i best define america with a group of high school students. i said one word -- possibilities. possibilities. i am absolutely convinced i am more certain, after having served 40 years in government, than i was when i was the idealistic young senator at age 29, i am more confident and convinced that there's no country -- and we want all countries to do well, but there's no country better positioned to lead the world in the 21st century than the united states of america. but only if we stay the course we're on with a strong, smart

leadership of president obama, looking forward and not in the rear-view mirror. thank you, ladies and gentlemen. may god bless you all and may god protect our troops. thank you. congress is on break this

week. here's a look at american history tv's lineup of programs. beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern, we follow three photographers who have captured images of the lives and work of three of america's first ladies -- betty ford, barbara bush and laura bush. at 9:00 p.m. eastern, barbara and laura bush talk with doris kearns goodwin. at 10:00 p.m., we'll hear from several women who served as right hands from first ladies from lady byrd johnson to laura bush. watch the role and influence of america's first ladies tonight on c-span3. the aclu has believed for some time that police departments around the country are tracking people's cell phones on a routine basis, often without getting a warrant based on probable cause. >> should tracking a cell phone require a warrant? tonight, american civil liberties union attorney katherine crump on police use of technology for surveillance purposes and whether current law adequately protects an

individual's right to privacy, at 8:00 p.m., on "the communicators," on c-span2. four years ago, i was a washington outsider. four years later, i'm at this dinner. four years ago, i looked like this. today i look like this. and four years from now,ly look like this. [ applause ] that's not even funny. >> mr. president, you remember when the country rallied around you in hopes of a better tomorrow? that was hilarious. that was the best one yet. [ laughter ] but honestly, it's a thrill for

me to be here with the president, a man who i think has done his best to guide us through some very difficult times and paid a heavy price for it. there's a term for guys like president obama. probably not two terms but -- there is. >> miss any part of the white house correspondents dinner? you can watch anytime online at the c-span video library. behind the scenes, the red carpet, and all the entertainment at c-span.org/videolibrary. this is c-span3, with politics and public affairs programming throughout week, and every weekend 48 hours of people and events telling the american story on american history tv. get our schedules and see past programs ot our websites. and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. with more people accessing video content online and a variety of mobile devices, the senate commerce committee recently looked at what the increase means for consumers,

technology, and the price of access. witnesses included the former ceo of paramount and fox as well as executives from amazon.com, microsoft, and the nielsen company. this is two hours. good morning, everybody. we have a very distinguished panel this morning, not that we don't always, but this is particularly so. and we welcome you all and hopefully there will be those surrounding this dais to ask you the most penetrating questions about the impenetrable future. but anyway, this hearing is about the emergence of online video and the power of broadband to change the way in which we watch. and who knows what that's going to be. this is the start of an exciting and timely conversation.

it's the first hearing that's been held on this subject, which is not sort of attacking each other but looking at it into the future and trying to figure out what's coming at us. can we handle it. now, why are we doing this? because television is just an overpowering force in our life, television meaning what a lot of people still watch. at its best, it can do more than entertain. it can educate. but not all television programming is enlightening, nor is it all fit for children's viewing. it's a global age, and i'm concerned the video content that we produce does not represent the best face that america has to the nation. so my first question is how will this disruptive technology -- when i say that, that's not a negative connotation. that's just the fact that things are changing so fast in such mam

mothly important ways that it is disruptive, in a hopefully positive sense but definitely disruptive. how will the disruptive technology that online view willing provide lead to better content and to more consumer choice. but more than content is at issue here, because year in and year out consumers face rate increases for paid television that are rising faster than the rate of inflation. we're paying for so many channels, though we usually only watch a few. i, for example, have 500 channels. and if i watch in the course of a month more than ten, i would be amazed. so why am i paying for 490? i have no idea. does it give me a warm, fuzzy feeling? not particularly. but on the other hand, ill's all there if i want to go get it. so who's to know about human

nature. so, i want to know if the emergence of online video will do more than improve content and expand choice. i want to know if it's going to bring a halt or a slowdown at least the escalating bills. one other point i want to make, i've said forcefully in the past that too much television programming is is crude and a poor reflection of our society. although this hearing is not focused on that topic -- and i want to make it clear -- i just also want to make it clear this is something i really care about very deeply as all of my suffering colleagues on this committee know, and i'm going to keep at it until it gets better or until i get to be my great-grandfather's age, whichever comes first. so right now the question is how do we harness this change for power for consumers so we can get higher quality programming at lower rates? but really more important, what's going to happen, what's going to happen?

the status of people who are cutting off land line for telephones can also be -- i mean i think i read that in the last month that nielsen had said that all broadcast news was down in the last month. now i guess if it's down over the course of the year it would be down over the past month, but it sort of grabbed me putting it that succinctly. to our witnesses, i look forward to your thoughts on this subject, and i thank you for joining us today. and i want this to be a lively and forward-looking theory. so, senator demint is the ranking member of the subcommittee on this subject. senator kerry is not here for the moment. and senator demint, we look forward to your comments. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i do thank all the witnesses for being here. thanks for holding the hearing.

the communications sector continues to be one of the most dynamic and innovative in our economy, and i hope this is just the first of many hearings this year that allow an opportunity to learn and discuss the marketplace and update the committee's record. mr. chairman, the obstacles between consumers and the video content they seek continues to disappear. and the video market tremendous advancements and technology and massive capital investments and distribution networks now empower consumers to craft their own viewing experiences more than ever. at the root of this increasing consumer power and choice is a complex and overlapping mix of content, creators, distributors, and electronic manufacturers racing to serve the marketplace better. a few such companies from this mix are with us today. with innovation and empowered individuals, however, come

disruption to established models and incumbent powers. unfortunately, many of our current video laws and policies were solvent achieved decades ago by established interest seeking government-granted protection from market forces. they were written for a time and a market that no longer exists, and they need to be repealed. our video laws simply do not reflect the current realities of the marketplace, and i'm afraid they actually foreclose innovative service offerings and consumer benefits. our laws should not promote or protect one technology over another or one competitor over another. last year i introduced the next generation television marketplace act to comprehensively withdraw government med frlg the video industry. there are two primary interventions the government has made over the years in the video market which my bill repeals. the compulsory copyright license

and retransmission consent. these laws impose mandates on individual consumers and businesses. they violate the property rights of content creators. and they treat similar services differently. while i know these legacy issues are not the focus of today's hearing, mr. chairman, i look forward to discussing them at a future hearing here in this committee. in his prepared remarks, mr. diller states that consumer demand is a powerful force and those who give consumers what they want will be rewarded in the marketplace. i couldn't agree more, which is why i believe we should be creating a deregulatory parody in the video market so investment and innovation, not lawyers and lobbyists, is rewarded in a free economy to the ultimate benefit of all consumers. finally, mr. chairman, i want to express my sincere interest in working together with you to

seek ways to improve our laws and regulations to better serve competition, innovation, the national economy, and, most importantly, the american consumer. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. and thank you for those comments, which obviously i share about working together. we have not sat together before, but we will sit together in the future. our witnesses are sublime. barry diller, who i've known for many years. my wife says hi. is chairman of iac, former chairman of paramount pictures, fox broadcasting, usa broadca broadcasting and investor in ariel. you're very knowledgeable about the history of video, and you have spoken previously about how the disruptive change presented by online video may change the nature of paid television. so we welcome your testimony, sir. >> thank you.

i'm glad to be before you today. i've had a long, some say too long career in entertainment and media. i've been chairman of three major studios, broadcast stations, broadcast network, cable channels, and now internet companies with more than 50 brands, so i've been both a practitioner and a student in the evolution of media over the last 45 years. with ubiquitous broadband internet access, an unlimited pipe of options will increasingly be available for all audiences. and together with the advances in consumer devices like the ipad, it will allow consumers to access the content they want directly from producers without middlemen, without toll takers, wherever and however they want. this is the great future of consumer choice and competition. and i think the realization of generations of public policy aspirations.

that is, if we protect and encourage the miracle of the internet, which allows anyone to press a send button and publish to without having to go through the closed systems that have so dominated media since its very beginning. contrast that with the past world of less than a handful of broadcast television stations. this evolved in the 70s and 80s with the advent of cable television and satellite video distribution but its development was encircled by rules and regulations designed primarily to preserve the incumbent broadcasters. hardly surprising that given any technology development that threatens the hedge of money of the existing players is going to be opposed by them. then along came video recorders. when sony introduced the beta max video cassette recorder. this was opposed in a suit by

universal and disney. at the time two of the largest producers of programming. they contended that no one should have the right to make a copy of their material. courts disagreed and the vcr business boomed. through the sale or rental of prerecorded video cassette tapes, cable and satellite offered all manner of services enabled by the technology of the video recorder. now, along comes the great revolution of the internet. affecting every pocket of commerce, except, oddly t way most people receive the most popular video programming. but even with the restrictive tv everywhere concept, the demand cable or satellite subscription, broadband internet has enabled a few online video on demand services to begin a transition to the online environment.

this great internet revolution is ready now to provide a new platform for competition. that will in turn lead to video packages and ala cart offerings driven by consumer choice and device innovation. rather than dictated by the financial interests of a handful of programmers and distribution companies. how can that not be in the public interest? there are no barriers to entry on the internet. creators have the opportunity to make and distribute whatever is their fancy. if intermediaries have less control over the tv ecosystem, creators would be able to reach viewers more directly, and will not have to sign over so many rights to distributors. viewers would benefit from being able to watch vastly more programming in the way they want to watch it, and from having an alternative to subsidizing the

current unwieldy marketplace. new technology can allow a more modern approach to receiving local broadcast programming. right now roughly 15% of americans rely solely on over the air television because it's difficult to install home antennas, or because of problems with reception. this ought to be of concern to congress which appropriated $650 million to ensure that households could actually receive the signals when digital replaced analog broadcasting. areo, a company in which i invested, has invented technologies that allow consumers to get a clear perfect picture over the internet and watch live, local broadcast television on any connected device, on ipad, iphone, or an internet-ready television set. it provides its members with

their own antenna, capable of receiving high definition local broadcasts. properly understood, areo allows a consumer to outsource or locate remotely an antenna and dvr and to use that equipment to access the over the air content to which they are all entitled. it's dvr in the cloud technology is a break through as the consumer need nos extra wires or set top boxes or remote controls that no one understands. by making over the air digital broadcast signals actually useful to consumers areo is bringing forth the very reality that congress sought, that congress invested close to $1 billion in and no additional cost to taxpayers. it's but one example of how the internet can inject competition. on line video is just beginning. it will take all kinds of new products, a lot of failures,

that will move these systems from a closed to an open environment. it will take vigilance to make certain that net neutrality continues to be safeguarded, that no road blocks or toll bridges can be inserted between the producer and the consumer. my hope is that congress keeps the most watch until eye as these market places develop. i know at some point soon the communications act of 96 will have to be rewritten to take into account the internet which didn't exist when the act became law. incumbents have natural incentives to limit competitive threats. congress should be vigilant that the rules of the game favor entry, innovation and competition. in the end there's no stopping technical innovation but i would hope that a wise and engaged congress will make certain that

we have the levelest playing field, most encouraging environment for new media over the next usual years of its development. thank you for listening and i'll be happy to answer questions i can. >> thank you, mr. diller. our next witness is miss susan whiting, vice chairman of the nielsen company. and i think you're going to talk about how american viewing patterns are changing, which is for sure. and that more households are watching on line video than ever before. you've been at this, your company has been at this for decades and you produced data about american television which is very helpful. and particularly helpful as we go into this disruptive period where nobody is quite sure where it's all going to end up so we welcome you. >> thank you. thank you, chairman rockefeller and other members of the committee, i'm vice chair of the nielsen company.

you are i think familiar with nielsen's role in television ratings but may not know we're also a global information and measurement company measuring what people watch on tv, on the internet, on mobile devices, but also what they buy in retail stores all over the world so i appreciate this opportunity. based on our latest research the average american watches nearly five hours of video each day, 91% of which is done watching traditional tv sets in real time or live, meaning they are not recording on a dvr, using video on demand or even watching a dvd. but what has emerged in the last four or five years is a simple message. consumers watch their favorite content on the best screen available at that moment. and they watch from more locations and on more devices than ever before. the availability of digital technology, digital access, and the explosion of lap top

computers, mobile devices and tablet computers in american life has really enabled this change. these devices along with at the same time a record number of tvs in homes have provided more screens. our latest state of the media u.s. digital consumer report provides a comprehensive over view of these trends. my testimony today is based on the findings in that report and the report has been provided to the committee. today more than 274 million americans have internet access through their computers which has doubled since 2000. in october of 2011, nearly 166 million americans watched video on line. and more than 117 million americans accessed the internet through a mobile device. nearly half of all the mobile devices used in the u.s. today are smart phones which makes it

possible to access the video. broadly speaking, each month the average american spends 146 hours and 45 minutes watching tv, 4 hours and 31 minutes watching internet videos on a pc, and 4 hours and 20 minutes watching video on a mobile device. so the use of video on pcs continues to increase, it's up 80% in the last four years. so who is using video this way? our research shows that women are 6% more likely to video video online than men. 18 to 34-year-olds, match 35 to 49-year-olds as the largest demographic watching videos on line. sites like youtube and netflix together recently represented 56% of the streaming time which for the average american is 4 hours and about 31